For the life of me, I cannot recall a federal judge ever expressing concern about “reputational harm” to any of the many public officials who were suspected of committing crimes in Maryland — or anywhere, for that matter.
There was one brief moment of sympathy offered by Judge Robert Love Taylor for the shameful situation in which then-Gov. Marvin Mandel found himself in October 1977.
“I have great sympathy for you,” said Taylor, in the southern accent he brought to Maryland from Tennessee for the Mandel corruption trial. “You have many good qualities. But I think you made some severe mistakes.”
Taylor had come from Knoxville to preside because so many judges in Baltimore had conflicts due to personal or political connections to Mandel. Taylor, a diminutive judge with a folksy style, sentenced the governor to prison for four years. Mandel immediately resigned from office. (His conviction was overturned a decade later.)
I must quickly add that Taylor’s sympathetic comments came at sentencing — several weeks after a jury had convicted Mandel of mail fraud and racketeering.
No such sympathy was expressed while Mandel was under investigation.
No such sympathy was expressed while Mandel was on trial.
In fact, such a thing, uttered by any federal judge, would have been inappropriate.
More than that, it would have been outrageous.
Any judge who expressed concern for “reputational harm” to the subject of a criminal investigation would never have been assigned to that…
